It's a rare occasion that I watch Jay Leno. I've always been a Letterman guy. Now don't get me wrong. When Jay was just doing stand-up and was an edgy, angry young comic, I laughed as hard at some of his stuff as I have at any other comic I've ever seen. He did a bit once (oddly enough, on Letterman) about trolls and circuses and spores and bridges and, well, you had to be there, I guess. But as a talk show guy... not so much. Bland, sold-out, annoying - you know the usual complaints. Now, in an effort to up his ratings before the handover to Conan (and who gives that great idea more than a week to live?), he booked this President Obama guy. And I watched. Hey, I like to see a potential disaster live as much as the next guy.
So, the conversation is going along okay. Keeping it kinda light - AIG, economy, Depression Mark II etc. And then Jay makes a simple aside about the White House bowling alley and if it's still standing, since Obama acquitted himself SOOO well in the campaign with that brilliant bowling photo op... And Obama, who's still campaigning (because THEY NEVER STOP!!!), tries for the regular guy vote by saying he's upped his high score to 129. Which is great, if, you know, you're like in 4th grade and get your clothes from the portly boys department, but still.
You may know, there's a reason that politician's humor is always written for them. And even then, they're usually horrible at delivering it. Obama's a little better than the average, but he's still no Shecky Greene. So, the other night, when the Prez boasts of his non Earl Anthony like prowess, Jay, whose humor has devolved from edgy and cutting to just snarky comes over all condescending and says "Hey, that's, uhm, very good". There, there. Very good little Bobby... And Barrack says, as near as I could hear it, "Great. This is like Special Olympics incentive". But "incentive" gets buried by the audience's laughter, because Obama doesn't have the comedic timing to know where to put the beat in for Jay's joke to get laughs. So, what all the rest of the world hears is Special Olympics - because, no matter how many times the clip is shown, they're too lazy to pay attention beyond the supposed spot of the foul. And the world expodes in canned, pre-ordained disdain, as they've been programmed to do by the media over the years. Obama said Special Olympics!!!!! Give me a freakin' break.
I've seen characters on tv shows - this MONTH - referred to as "special needs". When I was a kid, terms like retard and vegetable and short bus were commonly used for people who would participate in Special Olympics. Cruel? Yes. Necessary? No. Unkind? Certainly. Do people still use these terms? You mean, other than frat boys and their grown-up counterparts, Wall St. traitors? Well, probably not. At least not in public. But that does nothing to stop the pre-planned outrage machine from kicking into gear and acting like Obama started singing "Look at us, we're walking..."
I know, I know. Most of these charitable organizations have a lot of time on their hands. The economy is down. Donations are too. So if you can drum up some sympathy cash - despite the fact that what you CONSTANTLY say publicly is that your membership does not want pity - by playing up a public slight - THAT NEVER HAPPENED - then, you're gonna unleash the hounds. Immediately afterward, the national SO chairman "condemned" the "comment". Wasn't a comment Bubba. It was an adjective for the word incentive - listen again. Then my state's SO chairman issued his condemnation, as, I assume, did the chairman in every state of the union and Guam. I don't know about you, but, contrary to their planned outcome, I just wrote Special Olympics off my potential donations list (you know, when I get a job and have some money to spare...). I refuse to support an organization that capitalizes on someone's misfortunate comedic abilities. Especially an organization that exists to capitalize on someone's, uhm, misfortune.
Is it any wonder why this country is at the bottom in almost everything in the world, save mock indignation — and embezzlement?
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Bye Bye Bernie
So, what's up with Bernie Madoff? I keep calling and calling, and he refuses to answer my invitations to play golf or have lunch. I've told him I'll pick up the check. I mean, I read the papers. I know he and his wife are down to their last $67 million. And with no job opportunities likely in this recession that Obama has caused (God, I hope Rush can get us out of this!!), Bernie and his wife have to guard their money. I mean, who knows how long it'll be until people get back on their feet enough financially, for Bernie to be able to swindle them some more? And $67M doesn't go anywhere as far as it used to? Geez, have you seen the price of milk, or eggs, or private islands?
Now, I've got a few ideas about why 'Ol Bernie is in the situation he's in. Frankly, I'm amazed he got caught at all, though. Sure, that Markopolos guy was telling the Securities and Exchange Commission about BM (my pet name for Bernie) about 8 years ago. Had all the facts and figures to prove that BM was guilty of running a Ponzi scheme, too. And, btw, is it just me, or does that Ponzi thing sound like some kind of plan for Henry Winkler to imitate the Pope? Anyway... Markopolos told them about 5-6 different times and, naturally, they did what they're supposed to do with the information. They ignored it. I mean, they're good Americans, right? And, naturally, since some of them (the SEC guys) have at least finished college, they're not stupid. So they understood that, if you go and squeal on a big player like BM, that's not gonna be good for America, or for their careers. Who's gonna hire the guy who started the second great depression by taking down a sweet guy like BM? I know I wouldn't. And, not squealing, is soooo the American way.
America is a country founded on power. Some people have it and most people don't. And that's the way it should be. You don't want your power base spread out too thin. Otherwise, dumb, ordinary people will think they're important and that their decisions matter. I mean, do you want the OctoMom dictating foreign policy or what? That's what I thought... So the thing about having the power, is not letting people know when you have it. And these SEC guys respected that. They were sure not gonna blow the whistle on someone as "made" as BM. Who knows who he's connected to? I mean, his third cousin could be their boss. Or he might have been friends with a bunch of Washington types. That could get a mere SEC middle management guy a one way trip to Gitmo. We've all seen Harold and Kumar, right? So, no, best to play along. Let BM do what he wants. I mean, he's not hurting anybody. It's just some rich people's money. And they can spare it. There's plenty of young entrepenaurs in Indonesia who love to put in the 20 hours days to make more, so no problem.
No, these SEC guys were doing the right thing. Not informing on anything is the way to go. You can never tell who you might offend. And offending people can be bad for you. And what's more important than you after all? So no, if you know about some kind of "law breaking", whatever that is, then you should do the proud American thing. Keep it to yourself. Otherwise, first thing you know, other people will be reporting things and that's the edge of a very slippery slope that would have decent upstanding Americans so afraid to do anything wrong that they'd allow themselves to be forced into living by a some kind of code of decency, or laws, or some other whacky idea. I shudder at the thought.
Hey Bernie - call me!
Now, I've got a few ideas about why 'Ol Bernie is in the situation he's in. Frankly, I'm amazed he got caught at all, though. Sure, that Markopolos guy was telling the Securities and Exchange Commission about BM (my pet name for Bernie) about 8 years ago. Had all the facts and figures to prove that BM was guilty of running a Ponzi scheme, too. And, btw, is it just me, or does that Ponzi thing sound like some kind of plan for Henry Winkler to imitate the Pope? Anyway... Markopolos told them about 5-6 different times and, naturally, they did what they're supposed to do with the information. They ignored it. I mean, they're good Americans, right? And, naturally, since some of them (the SEC guys) have at least finished college, they're not stupid. So they understood that, if you go and squeal on a big player like BM, that's not gonna be good for America, or for their careers. Who's gonna hire the guy who started the second great depression by taking down a sweet guy like BM? I know I wouldn't. And, not squealing, is soooo the American way.
America is a country founded on power. Some people have it and most people don't. And that's the way it should be. You don't want your power base spread out too thin. Otherwise, dumb, ordinary people will think they're important and that their decisions matter. I mean, do you want the OctoMom dictating foreign policy or what? That's what I thought... So the thing about having the power, is not letting people know when you have it. And these SEC guys respected that. They were sure not gonna blow the whistle on someone as "made" as BM. Who knows who he's connected to? I mean, his third cousin could be their boss. Or he might have been friends with a bunch of Washington types. That could get a mere SEC middle management guy a one way trip to Gitmo. We've all seen Harold and Kumar, right? So, no, best to play along. Let BM do what he wants. I mean, he's not hurting anybody. It's just some rich people's money. And they can spare it. There's plenty of young entrepenaurs in Indonesia who love to put in the 20 hours days to make more, so no problem.
No, these SEC guys were doing the right thing. Not informing on anything is the way to go. You can never tell who you might offend. And offending people can be bad for you. And what's more important than you after all? So no, if you know about some kind of "law breaking", whatever that is, then you should do the proud American thing. Keep it to yourself. Otherwise, first thing you know, other people will be reporting things and that's the edge of a very slippery slope that would have decent upstanding Americans so afraid to do anything wrong that they'd allow themselves to be forced into living by a some kind of code of decency, or laws, or some other whacky idea. I shudder at the thought.
Hey Bernie - call me!
Monday, March 2, 2009
City Sidewalks, Snowy Sidewalks
I like snow. It makes me happy. Possibly, because I was born during a blizzard, the next day's vestiges of which, can be seen in any video of JFK delivering his inaugural speech in front of a frozen Capitol. Of course, I also live in a city. For those who don't know, this means I only have a small window to appreciate said snow. I basically have, "while it's falling" and about 10 minutes afterward to enjoy the image of a light, clean, fluffy blanket laid over the soul-crushing muck of urban living. The cracked, pot-holed, and oil-stained asphalt of the street (and the asphalt-stained oily crack and pothead laying on it) are hidden beneath, and gratefully out of eyesight for a few wonderful minutes. And then, as the first flakes begin to dress themselves in the layer of grime that will eventually coat them all as they dissolve into a disgusting black mound of slush, I have to deal with shoveling. Not mine as such, but that of my newbie neighbors.
I've lived in this same rowhouse, in this same neighborhood, for a long, long time. Long enough to see a whole generation pass away, another move away, a decline, a revival, and a gentrification "bloom" that has increased property values (and taxes) and completely done away with any sense of neighborhood we ever had. This is never more evident that when it snows. Now, I'm sure all neighborhoods have their "rules" of how to shovel their pavements when it snows. Because these homes are as urban as you can get (ie. no grass in front anywhere), we've always had a certain method for shoveling after a storm. The area between your steps and your neighbor's is never touched, and simply allowed to melt of it's own accord. We've always just shoveled a path about 3-4 feet wide in front of our steps and mounded up the moved snow on the remaining sidewalk along the curb. This is the optimum method for our conditions. It clears a path for people to walk along the sidewalk. It clears the entrance to your home because it lies perpendicular to the entrance stairs. And, when necessary, a small side path is cleared to the door of your vehicle. With this method, one can travel freely and never step into snow except possibly in the gutter as you leave the sidewalk. Unfortunately, this tried and true method doesn't suit the recent rural immigrants who populate my neighborhood now.
They are under some idea that ALL of the sidewalk must be cleared, from the front wall of the house to the gutter. Perhaps it was this love of a sheet of cracked concrete that caused them to move here in the first place. I don't know. Now, you might ask, where is that snow supposed to be moved to? Well, into the gutter of course, or for the really energetic, thrown into the street, which is never plowed, to thereby add a fresh layer of friction-melted, semi-frozen water to the already treacherous driving surface. And for the non-energetic? Well, just pushing all the snow, no matter how much there is, into the gutter seems to be the goal. Never bothering to consider that they are simply packing more snow around the wheels of the vehicles parked there, making it more of a hassle to get your car out onto the newly re-covered roadway. When a snow such as we had today comes (about 5 inches), granted, it's not so bad. No cars had to be shoveled out get into the street. But when a REAL storm comes, this is the most insane behaviour I've ever seen. Instead of clearing a serviceable pathway, they move a ton of snow off the sacred sidewalk and into the streets - causing anyone who wishes to leave the sidewalk, possibly to get to the other side of their vehicle, to have to climb over and/or through the drifts as if they were exploring a new powder field in the Alps. And when these snow removal geniuses begin to dig their vehicles out, do they then do the logical thing and put the moved snow on the curb where it will be out of the way as it melts later? NO. Then they shovel it further into the street's center where it will further hinder traffic. Makes snow sense to me...
PS, I apologize for not putting anything up lately. Not that I haven't been pissed off lately, of course. It's just that it hasn't warranted more than a paragraph. And I figure if you read this blog, you should at least get some quantity for your efforts, cause quality is not even remotely likely.
I've lived in this same rowhouse, in this same neighborhood, for a long, long time. Long enough to see a whole generation pass away, another move away, a decline, a revival, and a gentrification "bloom" that has increased property values (and taxes) and completely done away with any sense of neighborhood we ever had. This is never more evident that when it snows. Now, I'm sure all neighborhoods have their "rules" of how to shovel their pavements when it snows. Because these homes are as urban as you can get (ie. no grass in front anywhere), we've always had a certain method for shoveling after a storm. The area between your steps and your neighbor's is never touched, and simply allowed to melt of it's own accord. We've always just shoveled a path about 3-4 feet wide in front of our steps and mounded up the moved snow on the remaining sidewalk along the curb. This is the optimum method for our conditions. It clears a path for people to walk along the sidewalk. It clears the entrance to your home because it lies perpendicular to the entrance stairs. And, when necessary, a small side path is cleared to the door of your vehicle. With this method, one can travel freely and never step into snow except possibly in the gutter as you leave the sidewalk. Unfortunately, this tried and true method doesn't suit the recent rural immigrants who populate my neighborhood now.
They are under some idea that ALL of the sidewalk must be cleared, from the front wall of the house to the gutter. Perhaps it was this love of a sheet of cracked concrete that caused them to move here in the first place. I don't know. Now, you might ask, where is that snow supposed to be moved to? Well, into the gutter of course, or for the really energetic, thrown into the street, which is never plowed, to thereby add a fresh layer of friction-melted, semi-frozen water to the already treacherous driving surface. And for the non-energetic? Well, just pushing all the snow, no matter how much there is, into the gutter seems to be the goal. Never bothering to consider that they are simply packing more snow around the wheels of the vehicles parked there, making it more of a hassle to get your car out onto the newly re-covered roadway. When a snow such as we had today comes (about 5 inches), granted, it's not so bad. No cars had to be shoveled out get into the street. But when a REAL storm comes, this is the most insane behaviour I've ever seen. Instead of clearing a serviceable pathway, they move a ton of snow off the sacred sidewalk and into the streets - causing anyone who wishes to leave the sidewalk, possibly to get to the other side of their vehicle, to have to climb over and/or through the drifts as if they were exploring a new powder field in the Alps. And when these snow removal geniuses begin to dig their vehicles out, do they then do the logical thing and put the moved snow on the curb where it will be out of the way as it melts later? NO. Then they shovel it further into the street's center where it will further hinder traffic. Makes snow sense to me...
PS, I apologize for not putting anything up lately. Not that I haven't been pissed off lately, of course. It's just that it hasn't warranted more than a paragraph. And I figure if you read this blog, you should at least get some quantity for your efforts, cause quality is not even remotely likely.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)